27
Jun
By Eric Schweibenz
On June 24, 2011, the International Trade Commission (the “Commission”) issued a notice determining to affirm, on modified grounds, ALJ Carl C. Charneski’s December 16, 2010 Initial Determination (“ID”) finding no violation of Section 337 in Certain Multimedia Display and Navigation Devices and Systems, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-694).  The Commission further determined to terminate the investigation.

By way of background, the Complainants in this investigation are Pioneer Corporation and Pioneer Electronics (USA) Inc. (collectively, “Pioneer”) and the Respondents are Garmin International, Inc. and Garmin Corporation (collectively, “Garmin”).  In the ID, ALJ Charneski determined that there was no violation of Section 337.  Specifically, ALJ Charneski determined that (i) Garmin’s accused products do not infringe the asserted claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,365,448 (the ‘448 patent), 5,424,951 (the ‘951 patent), and 6,122,592 (the ‘592 patent), (ii) Garmin did not show by clear and convincing evidence that any claim of the ‘592 patent is invalid due to obviousness or lack of written description, and (iii) Pioneer satisfied the domestic industry requirement with respect to the asserted patents.  See our February 11, 2011 post for more details. 

On February 23, 2011, the Commission determined to review the ID in part and to request that the parties prepare written submissions responding to various questions concerning the issues under review.  The Commission also requested briefing on remedy, the public interest, and bonding.  See our February 28, 2011 post for more details.  On April 18, 2011, the Commission determined to extend the target date and to request supplemental briefing in connection with certain issues relating to domestic industry.  See our April 28, 2011 post for more details.

After examining the record of the investigation, including the ID and the parties’ written submissions, the Commission determined to affirm, on modified grounds, ALJ Charneski’s finding that Garmin has not violated Section 337.  In particular, the Commission determined to reverse ALJ Charneski’s finding that Garmin’s products do not infringe the asserted claims of the ‘951 patent, affirm the ALJ’s finding that Garmin’s products do not infringe the asserted claims of the ‘592 patent, reverse the ALJ’s finding that the asserted claims of the ‘592 patent are not invalid under the written description requirement, and reverse the ALJ’s finding that Pioneer has established a licensing-based domestic industry for the ‘951 and ‘592 patents.  The notice states that the ‘448 patent is no longer asserted in the investigation. 

Accordingly, the Commission terminated the investigation with a final determination of no violation of Section 337.
Share